Cerrado Manifesto
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
September 11th, 2017 Brazil destroyed 18,962 km2 of the Cerrado between 2013 and 20151. In other words, every two months during that time, an area of the Cerrado the size of the Greater London disappeared. Deforestation rates of the Cerrado have exceeded those of the Amazon for over 10 years. The pace of this destruction makes the Cerrado one of the most threatened ecosystems on the planet. Considered the birthplace of many of Brazil's great water systems, the Cerrado – the world’s most biodiverse savannah – has already lost 50% of its original area. According to a recent article published in Nature Ecology & Evolution2, the rate of destruction in the Cerrado will result in the catastrophic extinction of species. Moreover, continued destruction of the Cerrado will cause changes in the region’s rainfall patterns, affecting agricultural productivity3, as has already occurred in the Amazon4. The Cerrado stores the equivalent of 13.7 billion tons of carbon dioxide (CO2)5, and the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from native vegetation conversion will impede Brazil's international commitments under the climate and biodiversity conventions. The main cause of conversion in the Cerrado is the expansion of agribusiness. Between 2007 and 2014, 26% of agricultural expansion in the Cerrado occurred directly into areas of native vegetation6. In Matopiba alone – located in the states of Maranhão, Tocantins, Piauí and Bahia, and considered the main frontier of vegetation conversion – 62% of agricultural expansion replaced native vegetation7. Recent analyses suggest that, between 2000 and 2016, 49% of pastureland expansion in Matopiba occurred in the Cerrado8. An area that is converted for grazing is often later used for crops such as soy9. It is unnecessary for the livestock and agricultural sectors to continue expanding into natural habitats in the Cerrado, especially considering there are around 40 million hectares already cleared in Brazil suitable for cultivating soy – the main crop associated with the destruction of native vegetation10. Modest gains in cattle-raising efficiency would free millions of hectares for other types of land use11. Responsibility for this problem – and the search for solutions that can quickly stop the destruction of the Cerrado – is shared by all actors of the production and supply chains, from the producers to 1 INPE & Funcate, 2017. 2 Strassburg et al., 2017. 3Silvério et al., 2015; Spera et al., 2016; Costa e Pires, 2009. 4 Meyfroidt et al., 2014. 5 CEPF, 2016. 6 Carneiro Filho & Costa, 2016. 7 Ibidem. 8 IPAM, unpublished. 49% of the existing pasture area in Matopiba in 2016 was a result of native vegetation conversion since 2000. Data for this analysis is available on the Mapbiomas platform: http://mapbiomas.org/map#transitions. 9 Carneiro Filho & Costa, 2016. 10 Carneiro Filho & Costa, 2016. 11 Strassburg et al., 2014. consumers, including traders, meat-packing companies, retailers, investors, agricultural producers, and land developers. It should be noted that, while enforcement of environmental legislation, including the Forest Code, is important, it is not enough to ensure conservation of the biome, since it allows legal conversion of up to 80% of rural properties. The private sector has learned that it is possible to produce commodities while avoiding supply chains being directly associated with further conversion of natural ecosystems, as exemplified by the Amazon Soy Moratorium. Collaboration between different links of the production chain, together with government support and civil society monitoring, was the path taken by the Soy Moratorium, and should now inspire similar solutions in the Cerrado. The undersigned civil society organizations call for immediate action in defense of the Cerrado by companies that purchase soy and meat from within the biome, as well as by investors active in these sectors. This includes the adoption of effective policies and commitments to eliminate deforestation and conversion of native vegetation and disassociate their supply chains from recently converted areas. The Brazilian government also needs to ensure that the law and international commitments are met by putting instruments and policies in place that can improve governance of agricultural production in the Cerrado. It is essential that protected areas be created, and that the right of access to the land is guaranteed for indigenous people, traditional communities, and small farmers in the region. It is also crucial that official data on deforestation and native vegetation conversion in the Cerrado be published annually, as is already the case for the Amazon. Incentives and economic instruments need to be developed by both the government and the private sector to reward farmers’ efforts to conserve areas of native vegetation, even when they are eligible for legal clearance. This collective and multisectoral effort will enable production to continue while a diversified economy is developed in the region, guaranteeing rights and income for local communities and adequate protection of the Cerrado’s valuable natural ecosystems. THE FUTURE OF THE CERRADO IN THE HANDS OF THE MARKET: DEFORESTATION AND NATIVE VEGETATION CONVERSION MUST BE STOPPED MANIFESTO COSIGNERS . WWF-Brazil . Greenpeace Brazil . Amazon Environmental Research Institute (IPAM) . Institute of Agricultural and Forest Management and Certification (Imaflora) . The Nature Conservancy (TNC) . Earth Innovation Institute (EII) . Institute for Society, Population and Nature (ISPN) . Conservation International – Brazil (CI-Brasil) . Association for the Preservation of the Upper Itajaí Valley (APREMAV) . Green Initiative . APREC Coastline Ecosystems . Avina Foundation . Engajamundo . GeoLab/USP . Lagesa/UFMG . Lapig/UFG . PHS . Life Center Institute (ICV) . Amazon Institute of People and Environment (IMAZON) . Socio-Environmental Institute (ISA) . Pro-Nature Foundation (Funatura) . Conservation Strategy Fund (CSF) . Minas Gerais Association for Environmental Defense (AMDA) . LABAQUAC/Hippocampus Project . Ecological Research Institute (IPÊ) . Boticário Group Foundation for Nature Protection . BVRio Institute . Law for a Green Planet Institute . Amigos da Terra - Amazônia Brasileira . Wildlife Conservation Society – Brazil (WCS-Brazil) . Institute for the Conservation and Sustainable Development of the Amazon (IDESAM) . Çarakura Institute . Biodiversitas Foundation . American Man Museum Foundation (FUMDHAM) . National Wildlife Federation (NWF) . Ecoa – Ecology and Action . GTA Network . Zero Deforestation Group . Forest Code Observatory . Climate Observatory . Enviroment Defend Fund (EDF) . Center for Studies and Environmental Research of Northeast Brazil (Cepan) . Both Ends . Sociedade Civil Mamirauá (SCM) – Mamirauá Institute . Vitória Amazônica Foundation (FVA) . International Institute of Education of Brazil (IIEB) . Union of Concerned Scientists – UCS . Both ENDS . Slow Food Brasil . Sociedade Civil Mamirauá . Articulação Pacari de Plantas Medicinais do Cerrado . PEQUI - Pesquisa e Conservação do Cerrado . Instituto Pe. João Peter . Agência 10envolvimento . Instituto Oca Brasil . Instituto Mamirauá . Instituto Federal de Brasília (IFB) . Cerratenses – Centro de Excelência do Cerrado . Jardim Botânico de Brasília . Mighty Earth APPENDIX Additional data and references underpinning this manifesto 1. Rates of deforestation and conversion are extremely high A serious and consistent conversion process is taking place in the Cerrado. Even during successive droughts and crop shortfalls, the rates of conversion in the Matopiba region remained high, as demonstrated for the period between 2013 and 2015 (INPE & FUNCATE, 2017). In addition, the 10 municipalities with the highest deforestation rates in the Cerrado are located in Matopiba. 2. Territorial expansion and land conversion in Matopiba are uncontrolled Studies predict the conversion of 6.6 million hectares of land with low productive capacity and a high risk of desertification (Carneiro Filho & Costa, 2016). 3. The rates of deforestation and conversion could increase in 2017 due to: i. Increased rainfall after five years of drought, leading to a record soy harvest in 2017 (CONAB, 2017). ii. Capitalization of producers because of their harvests, increasing their capacity to invest in the expansion of their production into areas of native vegetation. iii. Potential approval of laws on foreign land ownership, further intensifying the strong real estate speculation market in the region (six bills included in PL 2289/2007, House of Representatives, 2017a). iv. Potential approval of laws regarding new regulations for the licensing of agricultural production, making procedures more flexible and facilitating land conversion (19 bills included in PL 3729/2004, House of Representatives, 2017b). 4. The expansion of production should only occur in previously cleared areas The 40 million hectares mentioned in this manifesto (Carneiro Filho & Costa, 2016) are enough for Brazil to meet the goals of soy production expansion over the next 50 years. The soy sector already knows how to expand into previously cleared areas, as this is standard practice in regions other than Matopiba, such as the Amazon biome and other areas of the Cerrado. 5. The law does not go far enough The law still allows for the legal deforestation and conversion of 40 million hectares of the Cerrado. Soy production expanded by over 250% in Matopiba between 2000 and 2014 (Agrossatélite, 2015), mainly through the conversion of native vegetation, which